<railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd like to have the "From" attribute set to my application's name, > rather than "From web."
This would be great .. I see it as only possible once they create some sort of third party authentication system so that the API know which application sent the status.
> On Mar 15, 2:44 am, "railheaddes...@gmail.com" > <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'd like to have the "From" attribute set to my application's name, >> rather than "From web."
> This would be great .. I see it as only possible once they create some > sort of third party authentication system so that the API know which > application sent the status.
> > On Mar 15, 2:44 am, "railheaddes...@gmail.com" > > <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'd like to have the "From" attribute set to my application's name, > >> rather than "From web."
> > This would be great .. I see it as only possible once they create some > > sort of third party authentication system so that the API know which > > application sent the status.
At the moment, Twitterific passes a special parameter to us when updating, and we simply verify that it's the string we're looking for. Dead simple, but decidedly manual. We've got something better in the works.
>> On Mar 15, 2007, at 5:28 PM, RickMeasham wrote:
>>> On Mar 15, 2:44 am, "railheaddes...@gmail.com" >>> <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I'd like to have the "From" attribute set to my application's name, >>>> rather than "From web."
>>> This would be great .. I see it as only possible once they create >>> some >>> sort of third party authentication system so that the API know which >>> application sent the status.
> At the moment, Twitterific passes a special parameter to us when > updating, and we simply verify that it's the string we're looking > for. Dead simple, but decidedly manual. We've got something better > in the works.
Awesome. I'm totally jealous of those Twitterriffic folks.
> > At the moment, Twitterific passes a special parameter to us when > > updating, and we simply verify that it's the string we're looking > > for. Dead simple, but decidedly manual. We've got something better > > in the works.
> Awesome. I'm totally jealous of those Twitterriffic folks.
Alex Payne wrote: > Please do start sending headers to us. It'll be most helpful for > planning our capacity.
I'd imagine we should be sending an X-Twitter-Client header rather than a User-Agent, as the actual User-Agent is good for monitoring (claimed) browsers and/or WWW libraries.
If User-Agent, then it should be *appended* to the existing one. Eg:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070309 Firefox/2.0.0.3 Twitter/GoogleGadget/1.01
I really want to push for X headers though. Even if twitter.com doesn't use them immediately, they may be of interest in the future (esp the URL for advertising a library of clients)
(The meta.xml would be something like the following:)
<client> <name>GoogleGadget</name> <version>2.01</version> <!-- so we need to update! There's a new one! --> <author> <name>Rick Measham</name> <email>goo...@twitter.isite.net.au</email> <twitter>RickMeasham</twitter> </author> <url>http://twitter.isite.net.au</url> <twitter>GoogleGadget</twitter> <description><[CDATA[ The Twitter Google Gadget brings all the fun of twitter to your Google personalised homepage. <a href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A//twitter.isite.net.au/tw..."><img src="http://buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif" width="104" height="17" border="0" alt="Add to Google"></a> ]]> </client>
Just my $0.02 .. I'll set the above X-Headers until I get word otherwise :-D
> Alex Payne wrote: >> Please do start sending headers to us. It'll be most helpful for >> planning our capacity.
> I'd imagine we should be sending an X-Twitter-Client header rather > than a User-Agent, as the actual User-Agent is good for monitoring > (claimed) browsers and/or WWW libraries.
> If User-Agent, then it should be *appended* to the existing one. Eg:
> I really want to push for X headers though. Even if twitter.com > doesn't use them immediately, they may be of interest in the future > (esp the URL for advertising a library of clients)
> (The meta.xml would be something like the following:)
> <client> > <name>GoogleGadget</name> > <version>2.01</version> <!-- so we need to update! There's a > new one! --> > <author> > <name>Rick Measham</name> > <email>goo...@twitter.isite.net.au</email> > <twitter>RickMeasham</twitter> > </author> > <url>http://twitter.isite.net.au</url> > <twitter>GoogleGadget</twitter> > <description><[CDATA[ > The Twitter Google Gadget brings all the fun of twitter to your > Google personalised homepage. > <a href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A// > twitter.isite.net.au/twitter.xml"><img src="http:// > buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif" width="104" > height="17" border="0" alt="Add to Google"></a> > ]]> > </client>
> Just my $0.02 .. I'll set the above X-Headers until I get word > otherwise :-D
Alex Payne wrote: > Those X headers are exactly along the lines of what I was thinking. > Thanks for setting a sane de-facto standard!
Woowoo! You should already have a pile of requests using them .. I'm also setting the X-Forwarded-For header as my Google Gadget needs a gateway to turn request parameters into basic auth (though I may be able to get it to do login-auth and avoid that .. Mmmm)
I've put the header information on the API Docs wiki (http://twitter.pbwiki.com/API-Docs) but noted that they're only in their infancy :)
Anyone else, feel free to comment .. especially on the meta XML.
> Alex Payne wrote: > > Please do start sending headers to us. It'll be most helpful for > > planning our capacity.
> I'd imagine we should be sending an X-Twitter-Client header rather than > a User-Agent, as the actual User-Agent is good for monitoring (claimed) > browsers and/or WWW libraries.
> If User-Agent, then it should be *appended* to the existing one. Eg:
> I really want to push for X headers though. Even if twitter.com doesn't > use them immediately, they may be of interest in the future (esp the URL > for advertising a library of clients)
> (The meta.xml would be something like the following:)
> <client> > <name>GoogleGadget</name> > <version>2.01</version> <!-- so we need to update! There's a new > one! --> > <author> > <name>Rick Measham</name> > <email>goo...@twitter.isite.net.au</email> > <twitter>RickMeasham</twitter> > </author> > <url>http://twitter.isite.net.au</url> > <twitter>GoogleGadget</twitter> > <description><[CDATA[ > The Twitter Google Gadget brings all the fun of twitter to your Google > personalised homepage. > <a > href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A//twitter.isite.net.au/tw..."><img > src="http://buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif" width="104" > height="17" border="0" alt="Add to Google"></a> > ]]> > </client>
> Just my $0.02 .. I'll set the above X-Headers until I get word otherwise :-D
> Cheers! > Rick Measham
> (RickMeasham)
Oh, that's rather good, Rick. I was going to have a more standard User-Agent string, but now you've upped the bar. On second thought, now you've given me more work -- dammit! ;)
> On 3/21/07, Rick Measham <r...@isite.net.au> wrote:
> > Alex Payne wrote: > > > Please do start sending headers to us. It'll be most helpful for > > > planning our capacity.
> > I'd imagine we should be sending an X-Twitter-Client header rather than > > a User-Agent, as the actual User-Agent is good for monitoring (claimed) > > browsers and/or WWW libraries.
> > If User-Agent, then it should be *appended* to the existing one. Eg:
> > I really want to push for X headers though. Even if twitter.com doesn't > > use them immediately, they may be of interest in the future (esp the URL > > for advertising a library of clients)
> > (The meta.xml would be something like the following:)
> > <client> > > <name>GoogleGadget</name> > > <version>2.01</version> <!-- so we need to update! There's a new > > one! --> > > <author> > > <name>Rick Measham</name> > > <email>goo...@twitter.isite.net.au</email> > > <twitter>RickMeasham</twitter> > > </author> > > <url>http://twitter.isite.net.au</url> > > <twitter>GoogleGadget</twitter> > > <description><[CDATA[ > > The Twitter Google Gadget brings all the fun of twitter to your Google > > personalised homepage. > > <a > > href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A//twitter.isite.net.au/tw..."><img > > src="http://buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif" width="104" > > height="17" border="0" alt="Add to Google"></a> > > ]]> > > </client>
> > Just my $0.02 .. I'll set the above X-Headers until I get word otherwise :-D
> > Cheers! > > Rick Measham
> > (RickMeasham)
> Oh, that's rather good, Rick. I was going to have a more standard > User-Agent string, but now you've upped the bar. On second thought, > now you've given me more work -- dammit! ;)
On 3/25/07, railheaddes...@gmail.com <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've added them to TwitterPost, but I'm still seeing "from web."
I think it will be a while until Twitter actually implement them at their end. At the moment, they're just "a sane de-facto standard", according to Alex..
You got it, Mario. We'll let people know when we start approving third-party applications to show up as the source on the web site. It should be tied into the release of our AuthSub/Flickr-auth system that Blaine has made mention of on this list.
> On 3/25/07, railheaddes...@gmail.com <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've added them to TwitterPost, but I'm still seeing "from web."
> I think it will be a while until Twitter actually implement them at > their end. At the moment, they're just "a sane de-facto standard", > according to Alex..
I'm holding off on a "real" release of my WordPress integration plugin because I want to include the proper headers. If I know they will begin working automagically in the future, I would go ahead and release it now.
> You got it, Mario. We'll let people know when we start approving > third-party applications to show up as the source on the web site. > It should be tied into the release of our AuthSub/Flickr-auth system > that Blaine has made mention of on this list.
> > On 3/25/07, railheaddes...@gmail.com <railheaddes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've added them to TwitterPost, but I'm still seeing "from web."
> > I think it will be a while until Twitter actually implement them at > > their end. At the moment, they're just "a sane de-facto standard", > > according to Alex..
As per the recently released official API documentation:
"the Twitter engineers are working an authentication scheme similar to Google’s AuthSub or Flickr’s API Authentication. This will have added benefit of registering third-party applications to better promote them on the site. The Development Talk group will be notified when this authentication scheme is ready for testing."
> As per the recently released official API documentation:
> "the Twitter engineers are working an authentication scheme similar > to Google's AuthSub or Flickr's API Authentication. This will have > added benefit of registering third-party applications to better > promote them on the site. The Development Talk group will be > notified when this authentication scheme is ready for testing."
> We're not quite there yet. Thanks!
I'm doing the triQQr tool for windows and extending it to use the new api functions.
That sounds good - do you have a time frame for this? Cause I had inserted a like to my tools homepage and I am justing dropping this behavior for the next version.
and keep the servers running ;) -- Siegfried // http://triQQr.de
